[DMCA-Activists] FTC Patent Reform Workshops in Feb/Mar 2005

[Seth Johnson]

From:

> http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/majoras/041118abafallforum.pdf


1. Patent Reform Workshops 

Along with the National Academy of Sciences  (“NAS”) and the
American Intellectual Property Law  Association (“AIPLA”), the
FTC will co-sponsor four  town meetings on patent reform in 2005.
Since the  FTC issued its report on competition and patent law 
in October 2003, there have been three noteworthy  developments
relating to it. 14 

First, the NAS issued a report advocating several  patent reforms
similar to those recommended by  the FTC, as well as additional
patent reforms. 15 

Second, patent law organizations such as the  AIPLA have issued
reports reacting favorably to  several of the FTC’s proposed
reforms. 16 

And finally, Congressmen Boucher and Berman  introduced a bill,
H.R. 5299, that would implement  versions of two of the proposed
reforms – a new  post-grant opposition system and certain
limitations  on liability for willful infringement – recommended 
by the FTC, NAS, and AIPLA. 

We believe it likely that Congress will discuss patent  reform in
the next session. To help lay the  groundwork for this
discussion, we have structured  our patent reform workshops as
town meetings. To  encourage broad participation from
businesses,  independent inventors, patent practitioners, and 
others, we will hold the town meetings in three  different
locations – San Jose, Chicago, and  Boston – in February and
March, 2005. We will  conclude with a program in Washington,
D.C., in  June. We will shortly announce details on the FTC's 
website, and registration for the town meetings will  be
available at the AIPLA website. 


-- 

DRM is Theft!  We are the Stakeholders!

New Yorkers for Fair Use
http://www.nyfairuse.org

[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or
distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. 
Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so
far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in
ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.